Re: SPAM DB 1.6.0 has been released - now OT if not originally

Ed Prochak <ed.prochak_at_magicinterface.com> wrote in message news:<2dz1c.828$xL.8_at_fe03.usenetserver.com>...
> Joel Garry wrote:
>
> > gforestieri9_at_yahoo.com (Greg Forestieri) wrote in message news:<6a8cdd95.0403030834.1b995b9e_at_posting.google.com>...
> >
> >>Ed Avis <ed_at_membled.com> wrote in message news:<l1llmndmay.fsf_at_budvar.future-i.net>...
> >>
> >>>Daniel Morgan <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> writes:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>>The point where I draw the line, others may draw it
> >>>>>>elsewhere, is when there is a for-profit organization with a business
> >>>>>>license waiting in the wings.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>I think this is right, and I would class articles about software
> >>>>>offering a 'free evaluation version' or limited-use licence as spam.
> >>>>>But I don't think that is the case here.
> >>>>
> >>>>Why not? The name of the product is clearly stated in the "subject"
> >>>>above which you have dutifully reposted. How does that not qualify as
> >>>>product promotion?
> >>>
> >>>I thought we were talking about your statement about a for-profit
> >>>organization and business licences, which is quoted above. As far as
> >>>I can tell there is no such setup for PEAR DB. There are no business
> >>>licences being sold, there is no company waiting in the wings to
> >>>force people to pay money. It is free software and free of charge.
> >>
> >>Cost is irrelevant. Is SPAM for a $10 database product less SPAMmy
> >>than one that costs $10000? No. That it is "free" (and here I recall
> >>the old saw about there being no free lunches) is irrelevant. This
> >>product "competes" with for-charge products. You may think
> >>open-source is a "good" thing, I wouldn't disagree that it has an
> >>important place in the world, but trumpeting open-source code differs
> >>only from trumpeting for-cost code in only one very small way. It is
> >>an ad. It is unsolicited. And it is SPAM.
> >>
> >>The whole idea behind having more than one news subgroup is so that we
> >>don't have to sift through "material" we don't want to. Some
> >>understand this concept. Others...
> >>
> >>Greg
> >
> >
> > http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/joel_garry/oraclech.htm
> >
> > Look at the cdo.marketplace charter again. It includes but is not
> > limited to software available for sale. So it clearly is the place
> > for software that costs money, and may or may not be the place for
> > free software.
> >
> > Now look at the cdo.server charter. "Discussions of software and
> > applications designed to aid in database administration should be
> > carried in this group."
> >
> > Now look at the cdo.misc charter. This whole question revolves upon
> > whether something free is considered commercial. So I'd agree with Ed
> > and > > >>> if I've got the attributions straight.
> >
> > Now, spam doesn't have to be commercial. In fact, I'd love to
> > e-strangle the jerk sending out all those psychotic christian email
> > messages (among others) with my cox.net addresses forged in the
> > headers. And I certainly have an emotional reaction about newsgroups
> > getting spammed, since I have seen them get destroyed (misc.jobs.misc
> > in particular still rankles after all these years), so I can
> > appreciate the necessity of vigilance.
> >
> > But I must say, I think it is appropriate to post about useful and
> > appropo free software in cdo.server or .misc. If there is evidence
> > that it is a come-on for a commercial or posted by someone who has
> > ulterior motives, that should be posted too.
>
> After reading that page, I would be a little more inclied toward your and Ed
> A.'s view with conditions.
> using the starter of this thread as a test case, would it's announcement then
> fit in the .tools area? There is some overlap, but .server says:
> "Tools and applications designed to aid in database administration."
> while the .tools charter has:
> :...tools available from Oracle Corporation, or designed to work with Oracle
> applications. Developers of end-user applications will find this newsgroup
> most useful."
> where a PHP tool would certainly be one for developing end-user applications.

Yes. I didn't go there because lately I've been using google to read groups, and just never quite make it to .tools (partly because the tools I use are so obscure there is nothing about them there). And of course, never actually followed through on checking out the original spam, er, post. ;-)

I think the charter is goofy on where to post about books, and am sorry it didn't differentiate between job postings and other commercial announcements - I almost never read .marketplace, and actually could be interested in some commercial announcements if they weren't so buried there. If there were a separate group for commercial announcements I would be much more inclined to think free software announces should go there. But as it is, I think free should be more appropriate in the non-market groups.

I think trying to add more groups at this time would fail due to insufficient interest.

>
> Further the tail end of the .tools charter says:
> "If the comp.databases.oracle.server newsgroup is created in this
> reorganization, then discussions of tools and applications designed for use by
> database administrators should be carried on in the .server newsgroup, and not
> the .tools group."
> implying that postings to .server should not included front end or application
> tools.
> >
> > I realize this may be a minority opinion here, and don't really have a
> > problem with self-appointed cdo spam police. It's just my opinion,
> > which I haven't changed in a long time. In fact, I think free
> > software should be encouraged, and vetted through the usenet
> > publishing process. Which process can be nasty, although it shouldn't
> > be.
> >
> > jg
>
> We need to hear more informed opinions on both sides. Glad to hear yours Joel.
>
> --
> Ed Prochak
> running http://www.faqs.org/faqs/running-faq/
> netiquette http://www.psg.com/emily.html

netiquette faq needs to have something about putting your entire post in the .sig :-) (Thanks for shortening your .sig, Jonathon!)

jg

--
@home.com is bogus.
" 'The Passion' has the cartoonish violence of a Sergio Leone Western.
You might even call it a spaghetti crucifixion, 'A Fistful of Nails.'
" - Maureen Dowd